Give me grotesque designs for children over white sports welfare shoes any day

Again with the price... nothing to do with looks.

The purpose of any "fashion" is to signal your status to others. $400 sneakers signal you have money the only way they can, by being as "eye-catching" (i.e. eye-abusive) as possible. The reason this doesn't work with sneakers is that sneakers are inherently a cheap product that were intended for playing sports and consequently being damaged and worn out fast. They are primarily sold to children, so they have very colorful and silly designs. As you have clearly demonstrated by posting these abominations, the only way to "stand out" in the sneaker world is to crank up the colors, lines, etc. even more, thereby becoming even more ridiculous looking.

Contrast this with "dress shoes" where more expensive models signal the intended message through superior materials, craftsmanship, and increasingly subtle design.

just compare this shitty $150 calvin klein dress shoe

with this $1000 aubercy

Notice that one doesn't have to plumb the depths of retarded gimmickry to convey "superior fashion" in this case?

The purpose of any "fashion" is to signal your status to others. $400 sneakers signal you have money the only way they can, by being as "eye-catching" (i.e. eye-abusive) as possible. The reason this doesn't work with sneakers is that sneakers are inherently a cheap product that were intended for playing sports and consequently being damaged and worn out fast. They are primarily sold to children, so they have very colorful and silly designs. As you have clearly demonstrated by posting these abominations, the only way to "stand out" in the sneaker world is to crank up the colors, lines, etc. even more, thereby becoming even more ridiculous looking.

Contrast this with "dress shoes" where more expensive models signal the intended message through superior materials, craftsmanship, and increasingly subtle design.

just compare this shitty $150 calvin klein dress shoe

with this $1000 aubercy

Notice that one doesn't have to plumb the depths of retarded gimmickry to convey "superior fashion" in this case?

The $1000 pair looks like a weekly sale from Aldi. This failed to prove the point entirely.

Really not seeing anything wrong with the CK shoe either, looks like a decent shoe.

I understand it's not a Bruno Maggli, but I'm not in the habit of dropping a grand on shoes like everyone else here, guess i'm poor

There's nothing wrong with them, but compare "ultra-luxury" shoes to "luxury shoes" in this case, then compare "luxury" sneakers to regular sneakers, and you can see my point. All fashion is largely bullshit, but at least in the former's case it isn't complete bullshit -- it's not the case that the more expensive class of shoe is actually uglier than the cheaper class.

There's nothing wrong with them, but compare "ultra-luxury" shoes to "luxury shoes" in this case, then compare "luxury" sneakers to regular sneakers, and you can see my point. All fashion is largely bullshit, but at least in the former's case it isn't complete bullshit -- it's not the case that the more expensive class of shoe is actually uglier than the cheaper class.

There's nothing wrong with them, but compare "ultra-luxury" shoes to "luxury shoes" in this case, then compare "luxury" sneakers to regular sneakers, and you can see my point. All fashion is largely bullshit, but at least in the former's case it isn't complete bullshit -- it's not the case that the more expensive class of shoe is actually uglier than the cheaper class.

Anyway, this is a tiny distinction. Your original post on sneakers proved you're entirely incapable of distinguishing the point between "effective" and "desperate".

"Effective", "desperate"? You may be overanalyzing things a bit. I can't speak for others but I buy (and wear) stuff because I like it, not because of a message I want to send out or any of the other things you've mentioned. Most of the stuff I posted wasn't even that expensive

The $1000 pair looks like a weekly sale from Aldi. This failed to prove the point entirely.

That Aubercy is a whole-cut shoe, meaning a single piece of leather which is extremely hard to do and the leather has to be flawless. Next, the dyeing is hand applied, reduced, re-applied, reduced, repeated over and over to get the effect. In person, you would not see the red highlights as much, only in the certain lighting.

The shoe is then hand burnished which can take easily up to 100 hours plus to get it right. The entire thing is bench-made and the inner is goodyear welted on a custom last.